Estudio de Factibilidad NavBlue

1 TECHNICAL FEASABILITY REPORT NAVB.DOC.18.
0084
MMMX - MMSM AIRPORTS 15TH OCTOBER 2018
Airspace Design technical feasibility of simultaneous

operations between Mexico City International Airport
(MMMX) and Santa Lucia military base (MMSM)
NAVBLUE
1 Rue Marcel DORET
31707 Blagnac
Your NAVBLUE Focal point : Maxime CAILLE

Mailto: maxime.caille@navblue.aero
Office: +33582053335
MOBILE: +33610148323
NAVB.DOC.18.0084
The assessment focuses on the technical feasibility of running both MMMX and MMSM simultaneously on an Airspace Design point of view
only. This document does not provide any definitive conclusion on the viability converting Santa Lucia military airbase (MMSM) into a mixed civil /
military airport and operate MMMX and MMSM simultaneously to increase global traffic throughput. Navblue hereby emphasises this assessment
shall be complemented with many other aspects such as economical evaluation, connectivity, passenger experience, infrastructure, ATM
systems and staffing and that any decision in relation to such project shall not rely only on the study.
2 TECHNICAL FEASABILITY REPORT NAVB.DOC.18.0084
This document has been prepared and checked by the following persons:
Doug MAREK
Written by:
ATC Expert
Jorge BLANCO MONGE
Written by:
NAVBLUE Chief Procedure designer

Mario PAVON HIDALGO
Written by:
NAVBLUE Procedure designer

Maxime CAILLE
Approved by:
NAVBLUE Project manager
Issue Date Review description

1.0 15th October 2018 Document creation
1. Executive summary
2. Project introduction
2.1. Introduction and purpose
2.2. Study team cooperation
2.3. Background and general overview
3. Project assumptions and strategy

3.1. Project assumptions
3.1.1. Runway and airport data
3.1.2. Traffic data
3.1.3. Design assumptions
3.2. Project strategy
4. MMMX – MMSM conceptual design

4.1. Current traffic from/to MMMX
4.1.1. Arrivals RWY05
4.1.2. Departures RWY05
4.2. Conceptual design stage 1
4.2.1. Principles and assumptions
4.2.2. Benefits
4.2.3. Description
4.2.4. Stage 1 CONOPS summary
4.3.2. Benefits
4.3.3. Description
4.4.2. Benefits
4.4.3. Description
List of figures
Figure 1, MEXICO CITY (MMMX) LOCATION ................................................................................ 9
Figure 2, MEXICO CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (MMMX) and Santa Lucia military airbase
(MMSM) ........................................................................................................................................ 10
Figure 3, MMMX runway chart ...................................................................................................... 12
Figure 4, Santa Lucia runway master plan .................................................................................... 13
Figure 5, MEXICO CITY AIRPORT ............................................................................................... 14
Figure 6, Geographical distribution of domestic and international flights ....................................... 15
Figure 7, “Temperatura media a nivel nacional y por entidad federativa 2017” (CONAGUA) ........ 16
Figure 8, Arrivals from the North to SLM VOR .............................................................................. 20
Figure 9, Arrivals from the South to SMO VOR ............................................................................. 21
Figure 10, Overlay of traffic and current STARs ............................................................................ 21
Figure 11, MMMX RWY05 Departures East .................................................................................. 22
Figure 12, MMMX RWY05 Departures South/West ....................................................................... 23
Figure 13, Actual traffic departing from MMMX ............................................................................. 23
Figure 14, Stage 1 STARs MMMX ................................................................................................ 26
Figure 15, Stage 1 STARS MMSM ............................................................................................... 28
Figure 16, Current MMMX SIDs .................................................................................................... 29
Figure 17, Stage 1 SID MMMX ..................................................................................................... 30
Figure 18, Stage 1 SID MMSM ..................................................................................................... 31
Figure 19, Proposed MMSM ILS approach and missed approach ................................................. 33
Figure 20, Stage 1 CONOPS ........................................................................................................ 35
Figure 21, details of CDO.............................................................................................................. 36
Figure 22, MMSM vs MMMX simultaneous approaches................................................................ 37
Figure 23, Stage 2 MMMX STARs ................................................................................................ 40
Figure 24, Stage 2 MMSM STARs ................................................................................................ 41
Figure 25, Stage 2 CONOPS overview ......................................................................................... 43
Figure 26, Stage 3 MMMX STARs ................................................................................................ 46
Figure 27, Stage 3 MMMX STARs (zoom merge point)................................................................. 47
Figure 28, Stage 3 MMSM STARs ................................................................................................ 48
Figure 29, Stage 3 MMSM STARs (zoom merge point)................................................................. 49
Figure 30, Stage 3 MMMX and MMSM SIDs ................................................................................. 51
Figure 31, Stage 3 MMMX Missed Approach ................................................................................ 52
Figure 32, Stage 3 Crossing at MEX ............................................................................................. 53
Figure 33, Stage 3 MMSM SIDs initial clearance .......................................................................... 53
Figure 34, Stage 3 MMMX and MMSM north arrival flows crossing .............................................. 54
Figure 35, Stage 3 MMMX and MMSM departures crossing ......................................................... 54
Figure 36, Stage 3 CONOPS ........................................................................................................ 56
Figure 37, Stage 3 CONOPS (only arrivals) .................................................................................. 57
1. Executive summary
CHAPTER 01
TH
MMMX - MMSM AIRPORTS 15 OCTOBER 2018
As per contract A200558, NAVBLUE, conducted a pre-study assessing the technical

feasibility of simultaneous operations between Benito Juárez international airport (MMMX)
and Santa Lucia military base (MMSM).
The conclusion of the study reveals that it is technically feasible to operate Santa Lucia
airport as a civil international airport, in parallel of keeping current Mexico City airport in
place.
This document provides several options of conceptual design, ranked by simplicity of

implementation.
Benito Juárez international airport being a very dense platform, local users and operators
(Air Traffic controller, Pilot…) have acquired over the years habits and methods that allow
a very efficient traffic management around the airport, leading to a 97.3% use of the two
runways maximum capacity.
From this perspective, the first proposed conceptual design (Stage 1) caters extremely
reduced changes to the current Air Traffic Management to and from MMMX, while
providing new ICAO compliant arrivals and departures from/to Santa Lucia airport. Stage 1
is easily implementable and requires reduced ATC familiarization and implementation
costs. However, because the MMMX traffic management remains unchaged, the dual
system MMMX-MMSM would not reach the maximum achievable efficiency.
The second proposed conceptual design (Stage 2) provides an enhancement of Stage 1

by implementating minimum changes to the current ATM system and relocating SLM VOR.
Stage 2 would provide increased separation between MMMX and MMSM traffic, providing
a larger buffer and enabling a higher traffic density.
Finally, Stage 3 considers a completely remodeled airspace with fully seprated traffic
between MMMX and MMSM for a maximum level of safety and efficiency. Stage 3 would
require heavy changes in the Airspace structure as well as complete training of ATC.
Overall, the expected capacity would reach a maximum of 130 (140) aircraft per hour
depending on the modus operandi of MMSM runways (non-independent or independent
runways), using 72 aircraft an hour to MMMX as a baseline.
2. Project introduction
CHAPTER 02
2.1. Introduction and purpose
Mexico City International airport (Benito Juárez, MMMX) was declared in overcapacity in
September 2014. In order to sustain the heavy and increasing traffic, Mexican major actors
in the commercial aviation industry are today considering two main options:
- Building of a new airport located North East of current Benito Juárez airport: Texcoco
project
- Converting Santa Lucia military airbase (MMSM) into a mixed civil / military airport
and operate MMMX and MMSM simultaneously to increase global traffic throughput.
The present document addresses the technical feasibility of the second option, which
consists in operating Benito Juárez and Santa Lucia airports simultaneously. It is meant to
provide a high-level procedure conceptual design, focusing on safety and inter-operability,
as well as preliminary traffic figures.
2.2. Study team cooperation
The Study Team was composed of the following individuals and organizations
Name Organization Role

Doug Marek NAVBLUE ATC/ATM/PBN/SID/STAR/CDM SME
Jorge BLANCO MONGE NAVBLUE Chief Procedure Designer
Mario PAVON HIDALGO NAVBLUE Procedure Designer
Maxime CAILLE NAVBLUE NAVBLUE Project Manager
2.3. Background and general overview
Located at the neighborhood of Peñón de los Baños within Venustiano Carranza, one of the
sixteen boroughs into which Mexico's Federal District is divided, Benito Juárez International
Airport is 5 k (3.1 nm) east from downtown Mexico City and is surrounded by the built-up
areas of Gustavo A. Madero to the north and Venustiano Carranza to the west, south and
east. As the airport is located on the east side of Mexico City and its runways run southwest-
northeast, an airliner's landing approach is usually directly over the conurbation of Mexico
City when the wind is from the northeast.
Mexico City currently unique commercial airport has suffered from a lack of capacity due to
restrictions on expansion since it is located in a densely populated area. In 2014, Mexican
authorities established and declared a maximum capacity of 61 operations per hour with a
total of 16 peak hours (7:00 –22:59). Another issue with the airport is the limitation that its
two runways provide, since they are used at 97.3% of their maximum capacity, leaving very
little room for new operations into the airport. Only government, military, commercial, and
specially authorized aircraft are allowed to land at the airport. Private aircraft must use
alternate airports.
Figure 1, MEXICO CITY (MMMX) LOCATION
In order to face this challenge, the construction of a new Mexico City international
airport was announced on September 2, 2014. However, because of the strong economic
and environmental impact of such project, another alternative is currently being studied,
which consists in remodeling the Santa Lucia military airbase (located 30km North of
MMMX) into a mixed civil/military international airport.
Figure 2, MEXICO CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (MMMX) and Santa Lucia military airbase (MMSM)
3. Project assumptions and

strategy
CHAPTER 03
3.1. Project assumptions
This study provides propositions of high level conceptual designs for future simultaneous
operations between MMMX and MMSM. The project assumptions are based on the
documentation provided by Grupo Riobóo S.A. as well as additional sources such as MMMX
AIP or flight track from FlightRadar24™ platform.
3.1.1. Runway and airport data
For MMMX, the data published in the AIP were used for the conceptual design.
Figure 3, MMMX runway chart

For MMSM, the following data were used as a basis for the design of the procedures.
Figure 4, Santa Lucia runway master plan
Given the configuration of the surrounding terrain, the pre-study will assume two runways
operating in simultaneous segregated operations, with the left runway (04L) preferred for
landing and the right runway (04R) preferred for takeoff.
3.1.2. Traffic data
It was agreed that the new concept of operation (CONOPS) should concentrate most of the
domestic flights to Benito Juárez International Airport, when Santa Lucia airport would be
mostly used for international flights.
In order to acquire a comprehensive picture of the existing traffic in Mexico City, the overall
traffic from and to Benito Juárez International Airport was captured through Flight Radar24™
(24 hours window the 1st of June 2018). The tracks are displayed below.
Figure 5, MEXICO CITY AIRPORT
In addition to providing detailed information about the traffic flow management in Mexico
City, the previous data allows to geographically sectorize domestic and international flight.
For the reference day of 1st of June 2018, the distribution of domestic and international traffic
was as displayed in figure 6 Next page.
The analysis of the radar tracks shows the following strong city pairs:
For domestic flights:
Cancun/Merida – Mexico City (North East sector)

Guadalajara/Tijuana – Mexico City (North West sector)
For international flights:
USA East cost / Europe – Mexico City (North East)

California – Mexico City (North West)
Lima / Bogota / Medellin / Quito – Mexico City (South East)
The proposed design will be developed in order to provide the best efficiency on the heavy
sectors of Mexico City Airspace.
Figure 6, Geographical distribution of domestic and international flights
Note: The above distribution considers destinations with at least 3 flights a day
Finally, because of the limited information available and the absence of a defined plan
regarding the future military activity in Santa Lucia, the study focuses only on inter-
operability between commercial traffic operating in MMMX and MMSM. The military activity
on Santa Lucia Airbase was excluded from the scope of the analysis.
3.1.3. Design assumptions

It is important to highlight that the pre-study conclusion in terms of IFP design feasibility is
derived from numerous assumptions and subjected to several uncertainties in terms of input
data and local regulations. In addition, it has not been tackled a formal obstacle assessment.
In case of deciding to implement the proposed concept, it will be needed to launch the IFP
process taking this ConOPS as the operational input.
The flight procedures design criteria used for the pre-study are stated in the ICAO Doc. 8168
Volume II (Amdt. 7). In addition, the ICAO Doc. 9643 provides complementary criteria to be
considered for simultaneous operations in MMSM airport.
The main assumptions considered in the pre-study:
- SID / STAR / IAP initial and MAP RNAV-1: Based on GNSS sensor (in case of need
to consider DME/DME, no major impact in the design is expected).
- ISA variation: The MMMX reference temperature in the AIP is 27ºC and the mean
temperature in the Distrito Federal 18ºC (source Conagua). The ISA temperature at
MMMX altitude is around 1.1ºC. For the pre-study was considered ISA+15ºC.
Figure 7, “Temperatura media a nivel nacional y por entidad federativa 2017” (CONAGUA)
Protection areas and Obstacle/terrain assessment:
For the pre-study, a high-level terrain interference assessment has been performed. The
protection areas shall be fine-tuned in the further stages if applicable. Terrain data have
been obtained processing the SRTM DTM model from the USGS (US Geological Survey).
SRTM (Shuttle Radar Topography Mission) elevation data were processed from raw C‐band
radar signals spaced at intervals of 1 arc‐second (approximately 30 meters) at NASA’s Jet
Propulsion Laboratory (JPL).
The input data and sources used in the pre-study have been taken from Mexico AIP (Amdt.
AIRAC 10/18)
- Aeronautical data, local procedures and instrument flight procedures of MMMX.

- CTA Mexico structure and MVA chart.
- En route structure.
3.2. Project strategy
The implementation of flight operations in a new international airport in a relatively confined

area (Mexico City being surrounded by high terrain) requires a thorough study and major
changes at many levels (infrastructure, operations, safety, finance…). Such project usually
being completed over several years, this document provides 3 conceptual designs which
represent three stages with various level of complexity and expected implantation time. Each
stage will be thoroughly detailed in chapter 4.
Stage 1: Short term implementation (6-18 months, increase in capacity of 49%)
The objective of stage one is to provide a conceptual design that allows operating
commercial traffic in MMSM with minimal impact on today’s concept to manage traffic
from/to MMMX and therefore limited investment on infrastructure, Air Traffic Controller
training, as well as pilot habits and experience in the area. The approach sequence (from
IAF to the runways) will be identical from stage 1 to stage 3. Stage 1 assumes a single
runway at MMSM.
Stage 2: Medium term implementation (18-24 months, increase in capacity of 89%-104%)
The objective of stage 2 is to enhance efficiency of stage 1 by slightly modifying navigation

infrastructures. Stage 2 requires minor to medium change in the ATM system. Stage 2
assumes two runways at MMSM.
Stage 3: Long term implementation (24-48 months)
Stage 3 provides a preliminary conceptual design that requires a global modification of

Mexico City TMA. It is meant to provide optimized traffic flows to/from both Benito Juarez
and Santa Lucia international airports with the highest level of efficiency.
4. MMMX – MMSM conceptual

design
CHAPTER 04
4.1. Current traffic from/to MMMX
The current traffic at MMMX airport has been used as a “baseline” for stage 1 conceptual
design.
4.1.1. Arrivals RWY05

According to the FlightRadar24™ tracks, the low altitude traffic is mostly managed using
SLM (Santa Lucia), SMO (San Mateo) and MEX (Benito Juarez airport) VORs.
Figure 8, Arrivals from the North to SLM VOR
Figure 9, Arrivals from the South to SMO VOR
Figure 10, Overlay of traffic and current STARs
From the North, flight to MMMX are vectored to either SLM or SMO VOR, followed by a
base leg from SMO VOR that intercepts MMMX RWY05R ILS with an intercept angle greater
than 90° at 5Nm from the runway threshold.
The Procedures are limited in altitude with the following constraints:
- Above 13000ft and below 16000ft over SLM VOR

- Above FL240 over MEX VOR
- Above 18000ft in the “trombone” downwind
- At 12000ft over SMO VOR.
4.1.2. Departures RWY05
Figure 11, MMMX RWY05 Departures East
Figure 12, MMMX RWY05 Departures South/West
Figure 13, Actual traffic departing from MMMX

Stage 1 proposal is based on a short-term implementation scenario and can be done in
parallel of infrastructure construction on Santa Lucia airport (6 to 18 months). The new
structure enables to operate safely and simultaneously the two airports, with minimum
changes brought on current MMMX traffic management.
The following assumptions and hypothesis have been taken into consideration:
- Airport configuration:
o East configuration in both airports, RWYs 05 and 04 in operation.
o MMMX Rwy 05 for approaches / Rwy 05R for departures.
o MMSM single civilian runway operation (i.e. one military runway and one
civilian runway) with one departure for every arrival. The compatibility with
military operations on the current MMSM runway is out of the scope of this
study.
- Airspace structure: Minor adjustments on vertical restrictions in the current

SID/STARs routes. New procedures for MMSM.
- Navigation infrastructure. No expected changes.
- En Route connection: Traffic will enter and exit to the TMA using the current ATS
routes.
- Navigation specification: Assuming that proposed concept will be applied in a radar

environment, it is proposed the implementation of:
o SID/STAR RNAV-1 in MMSM. Departure and approaches trajectories will not
be changed for MMMX
o Instrument Approach procedures RNAV-1 to ILS or RNP APCH to MMSM
o MMSM missed approach based on RNAV-1.
4.2.2. Benefits
The potential benefits to be obtained from the implementation of this scenario are:
- Simplicity: The changes brought to the existing airspace will require minimum ATC
training. The new CONOPS uses existing Navigation aids and SID/STAR system for
MMMX.
- Procedural vertical separation will be provided in the arrival/departure or

departure/missed approach crossing points.
- The sequencing of international aircraft to MMSM would be accomplished on the

same high altitude point merge system at a procedurally separated lower flight level
than MMMX.
- The MMSM RNAV-1 to ILS would resemble the current ILS approach to MMMX,
giving ATC a similarity in already familiar sequencing, spacing, and speed control.
- Flight crews would have minimal changes to MMMX and a very familiar STAR and
approach to MMSM.
- Cost for procedural design and ATC training would be kept to a minimum.
4.2.3. Description
4.2.3.1 MMMX Closed STAR structure
The incoming domestic traffic will be guided to the Mexico City airport proceeding from the
same ATS routes and entry points as today:
- North and Northwest

o UJ5-33 (QET VOR/DME)
o UJ47-81 (SASUT)
- East
o UJ55 (DATUL)
o UJ12/UJ5/UM787/UJ33/UL308/-81 (PBC VOR/DME)
- South
o UJ24S/UJ21W/UJ71/UL423 (TEQ VOR/DME)
The proposed design modifications on the MMMX STAR system consists in creating and
modifying some altitudes constraints to provide vertical separation with the traffic going to
Santa Lucia airport.
The detail of the proposed changes is described in the table and graph next page:
Controlling waypoint Previous altitude Proposed altitude

constraints constraint
SLM B16000/A13000 B17000/A15000
New waypoint midway between N/A B15000/A13000
SLM and SMO
Figure 14, Stage 1 STARs MMMX
4.2.3.2 MMSM Closed STAR structure

The new runways of Santa Lucia airport will accommodate the international flights
proceeding from the same ATS routes and entry points than for Mexico City Airport.

o UJ47-81 (SASUT)
- East
o UJ55 (DATUL)
- South
From the North, the traffic to Santa Lucia airport will evolve underneath the traffic to Benito
Juárez (Santa Lucia being Northern than Benito Juarez, the aircraft will naturally be lower).
The feeding remains from DATUL and QET VOR/DME, merging in a long base leg heading
south bringing to the new Santa Lucia ILS for approach description, refer to section 4.2.3.5).
From the South, the traffic will be sent on a trombone using SLM VOR. The altitude
constraint on SLM VOR will be set below 14000ft and above 12000ft to remain under the
traffic going to MMMX. On the leg towards SLM, altitude constraints will be set (above
15000ft) in order to keep departing traffic from Santa Lucia and Benito Juarez below arriving
traffic.
Figure 15, Stage 1 STARS MMSM
4.2.3.3 MMMX SID

In order to ease implementation, the proposed ConOPS provides very limited modifications
to the current departures included in the AIP published SID1 chart.
Figure 16, Current MMMX SIDs
As a reminder, the connection with enroute phase and current PDGs associated to these
procedures are included in the table below:
SIDs Route connection - Outbound flow PDG

MUXEP1 UJ15-38 north/northeast 3.94%
OMPUT1 J177 north/northeast 3.94%
APAN7A UJ28-30/UT19/UT42/UJ18 east 5.26%
PBC4C UL318/UJ47 east/south-east 5.26%
CUA5A UJ15/UJ39 south 4.77%
TLC6A UJ18/UJ30 west/southwest 4.77%
PTJ5A UJ45 northwest 4.77%
As it is stated in the SID1 remarks, the SIDs could be changed in accordance with ATC
instructions by means of radar vectors and/or speed changes. The exit point of Benito
Juarez will remain unchanged.
The only modification brought to the departures will be an altitude constraint (below 13000ft)
placing departing aircraft below the flight arriving from the South to Santa Lucia (refer to
4.2.4 for visual reference).
Figure 17, Stage 1 SID MMMX
4.2.3.4 MMSM SID

Santa Lucia airport will be fitted with departures to 5 exit points:
- TLC VOR for flights to the West

- MUXEP/OMPUT for flight to the North East
- APN VOR for flights to the South East
- CUA VOR for flight to the South
It should be highlighted that departures towards the West will overfly MEX VOR and Mexico
City. However, initial computations show that once crossing MEX VOR, aircraft should have
reached an altitude of at least 18000ft, which should limit noise disturbance along that
trajectory.
Figure 18, Stage 1 SID MMSM
4.2.3.5 MMSM Approach and missed approach

The approach proposal is a RNAV-1 to ILS procedure with the following characteristics:
The initial approach segment consists of three legs before the LOC course interception. The
LOC angular interception is 30º at the IF established at 9000ft, 2NM before FAP. The final
approach descend starts at 9000ft, 5.5NM from the displaced THR04L (*)
The approach Glide Path and Reference datum height (RDH) will be standard (3.0º and
50ft).
The project assumes that the preferred runway for landing and take-off is RWY04. The
missed approach will turn to the north as soon as possible to diverge at least 30º with respect
to the departure (i.e. once the terrain and obstacles were cleared). The missed approach
will connect the procedure IAF at 12000ft.
(*) In order to beneficiate from sufficient obstacle clearance on the ILS final segment (San
Mateo mountain), it is proposed to displace the landing threshold by 600m. According to the
runway characteristics provided in section 3.1.1, the remaining runway length would be
4500m.
Figure 19, Proposed MMSM ILS approach and missed approach
• Single Runway assumed at MMSM
• Combined arrival/departure traffic increases considering both airports and using a

declared MMMX capacity of 61 an hour as a base line;
o MMSM one runway operation (1 DEP per 1 ARR): MMMX 61 + MMSM 32 =

max rate 93 per hour. (49% increase over current traffic capacity)
o MMSM capacity based on 16 arrivals = 3.75 minutes between arrivals which
equals 8-9nm between arrivals to allow one departure for every arrival. The
extra distance is due to higher speeds/distances required at altitude of MMSM.
• The CDO descents, to the extent possible are based on ICAO Doc 9931, Continuous
Descent Operations (CDO).
• Concurrent CDO STARs are based on the lower STAR’s altitude windows being at
or below over a fix 5 NM before the higher STAR’s at or above (example below).
• ATC Enroute sectors would keep the MMSM arrival aircraft below the MMMX arrivals
before entering the high altitude point merge.
• Top of descent would be in accordance with “Descend Via or Descend On” altitude,
speed and heading requirements programed into the FMS of the aircraft.
• Not having a holding pattern for traffic over SLM or the IAFs could be alleviated by
ATC assigning the arrival to follow the approach path at 11,000ft back to the IAF
via SLM and then the trombone.
• Two MMSM ATC sectors would be required to accommodate the increase in traffic.
Figure 20, Stage 1 CONOPS provides a global overview of Stage 1 proposal.
Figure 20, Stage 1 CONOPS
The CDO descents, to the extent possible are based on ICAO Doc 9931, Continuous
Figure 21, details of CDO
Concurrent CDO STARs are based on the lower STAR’s altitude windows being at or
below over a fix 5 NM before the higher STAR’s at or above.
Figure 22, MMSM vs MMMX simultaneous approaches

Stage 2 proposal is based on a short to medium term implementation scenario (18 to 24
months) which requires the establishement of a waypoint ot take the place of the SLM VOR
creating a new merge point approximately 6nm southwest of the current SLM merge point.
It will not impact the current conventional approaches to Santa Lucia airport (currently the
military approaches are based on the VOR only). The impact on mixing RNAV with the
conventional approaches is not assessed on this pre-study since it is replaced by the RNAV
to ILS approach.
o East configuration in both airports, RWYs 05 in operation.
o MMMX Rwy 05L for approaches / Rwy 05R for departures.
o MMSM Segregated parallel approaches/departures in a semi-mixed mode. It
is assumed departures from RWY04L/R and approaches to RWY04L. The
compatibility with military operations in the current MMSM runway is out of the
scope of this study.
- Airspace structure: Minor adjustments on vertical restrictions in the current

SID/STARs routes. New procedures for MMSM.
- Navigation infrastructure: Creation of new waypoints and slightly modified

trajectories to MMMX.
- En Route connection: Traffic will enter and exit to the TMA using the current ATS
routes.

o SID/STAR RNAV-1 in MMSM and MMMX
o Instrument Approach procedures RNAV-1 to ILS or RNP APCH to MMSM
o Missed approaches based on RNAV-1.
4.3.2. Benefits
The potential benefits to be obtained from the implementation of this scenario are:
- Simplicity: The changes brought to the existing airspace will require simplified ATC
training.
- Procedural vertical separation will be provided in the arrival/departure or

departure/missed approach crossing points.
- Horizontal separation will be more efficient than for stage 1 providing a more
comfortable environment to ATC.
- The sequencing of international aircraft to MMSM would be accomplished on the

same high altitude point merge system at a procedurally separated lower flight level
then MMMX.
- The MMSM RNAV to ILS would resemble the current ILS approach to MMMX, giving
ATC a similarity in already familiar sequencing, spacing, and speed control.
- Flight crews would have minimal changes to MMMX and a very familiar STAR and
approach to MMSM.
- Cost for procedural design and ATC training would be kept to a minimum.
4.3.3. Description
4.3.3.1 MMMX Closed STAR structure
same ATS routes and entry points as today:

o UJ47-81 (SASUT)
- East
o UJ55 (DATUL)
- South
The proposed design is very similar to stage 1, but provides better tools to ATC to ensure
aircraft separation. The modifications on the MMMX STAR system consists in rerouting
arriving aircraft coming from the North East to a slightly more westerly trajectory to provide
more room for MMSM arrivals, as well as creating and modifying some altitudes constraints
to provide vertical separation with the traffic going to Santa Lucia airport.
This STAR configuration can also be achieved by using waypoints instead of the SLM VOR.
By doing so, the arrival from DATUL would become a full RNAV1 arrival.
Figure 23, Stage 2 MMMX STARs
4.3.3.2 MMSM Closed STAR structure

The MMSM STAR structure remains would the almost the same than presented in stage
(Refer to 4.2.3.2). The main difference is that aircraft arriving to current SLM position and
landing at Santa Lucia would be laterally and vertically separated from aircraft on Benito
Juarez STAR. This would allow a better management of the descent profile for aircraft to
Santa Lucia with limited level off over SLM and therefore increase of efficiency.
Figure 24, Stage 2 MMSM STARs
4.3.3.3 MMMX SID

The MMMX SID structure would remain the same as in Stage 1. Refer to 4.2.3.3.
4.3.3.4 MMSM SID

The MMSM SID structure would remain the same as in stage 1. Refer to 4.2.3.4.

The MMSM approaches would remain the same as in stage 1. Refer to 4.2.3.5.
• Combined arrival/departure traffic increases considering both airports and using a

declared MMMX capacity of 65 an hour as a base line;
o MMSM two runway non independant operation (1 DEP, 1 ARR): MMMX 65(*)
+ MMSM 58(**) = max rate 123 per hour.
(*) Considering that most of the heavy aircraft would be dispatched to Santa Lucia and
replaced by medium to large aircraft, the average separation on final and between
departures would decrease, avoid A380/B747 having to taxi back and cross mid field, thus
leaving room for more aircraft.
(**) MMSM 58 rate is lower based on international traffic mix including a higher number of
heavies, requiring more ATC separation on final, and ATC use of new procedures/sectors
that are not optimized for two airports.
o MMSM two runway independent operation: MMMX 65 + MMSM 68(**) = max

rate 133 per hour.
• New ATC sectors and a reorganization of some traffic flows would lead to increased
safety and efficiencies.
• Moving MMMX merge point would increase separation between MMMX and MMSM
traffic, providing a larger buffer and enabling a higher traffic density.
• The CDO descents, to the extent possible are based on ICAO Doc 9931, Continuous
• Concurrent CDO STARs are based on the lower STAR’s altitude windows being at
or below over a fix 5 NM before the higher STAR’s at or above. Example below.
• ATC Enroute sectors would keep the MMSM arrival aircraft below the MMMX arrivals
before entering the high altitude point merge.
• Top of descent would be in accordance with “Descend Via or Descend On” altitude,
speed and heading requirements programed into the FMS of the aircraft.
• Not having a holding pattern for traffic over SLM of the IAFs could be alleviated by
ATC assigning the arrival follow the approach at 11,000ft back to the IAF via SLI and
then the trombone.
• One additional (including the two in phase 1) MMSM ATC sectors would be required
to accommodate the increase in traffic.
Figure 25 next page provides a global overview of Stage 2 proposal.
Figure 25, Stage 2 CONOPS overview

The Stage 3 is based on a medium to long term implementation scenario. It is acknowledged
that, at least a couple of years will be needed to implement changes associated to this new
Operational Concept. The new sector and route structure will enable to get the maximum
benefit from the new airport system operation in Mexico TMA, while traffic count would only
increase slightly, an increase in safety and CDO/CCO fuel savings and decreasing flight
miles and CO2 emissions will be observed. This proposal is aligned with the global ICAO
PBN implementation strategy as it is considers the PBN application in all flight phases. This
proposal serves as as starting point upon which consultation with existing Air Ttaffic
Controllers and system users should occur prior to settling upon a final design.
o East configuration in both airports, RWYs 05 and 04 in operation.
o MMMX Rwy 05L for approaches / Rwy 05R for departures.
o MMSM Segregated parallel approaches/departures in a semi-mixed mode. It

is assumed departures from RWY04L/R and approaches to RWY04L. The
compatibility with military operations in the current MMSM runway is out of the
scope of this study.
- Navigation infrastructure: VOR infrastructure could be discontinued.
- Airspace structure: There are not expected major changes in the airspace structure,
TOLUCA/PUEBLA/MEXICO TMAs. Some minor adjustments could be required in the
ATC sectors limits to accommodate “concurrent CDO/CCO” procedures.
- En Route connection: Traffic will enter and exit the TMA using the current ATS
routes. The option 3 design keeps the connection with the main flows through the
same routes with the exception of the international traffic coming from the northwest.
The incoming traffic from US west coast will be proceed from SASUT (UJ-47) or
AVSAR (UJ-81) instead of QET (UJ-5 33).

o SID/STAR RNAV-1 in both airports. It is needed to replace the conventional
MMMX SID/STAR. The new MMSM SID and STAR
o Instrument Approach procedures RNAV-1 to ILS or RNP APCH.

o Missed approaches based on RNAV-1.
4.4.2. Benefits
In addition to the already known benefits derived from the PBN implementation (ICAO Doc.
9613, Predictable trajectories, repeated tracks, cost savings based on removal of expensive
ground navigations means…), there are additional benefits to be obtained from the
implementation of this scenario:
- Lateral segregation of the inbound traffic to MMMX and MMSM and vectoring areas.
Air traffic controllers could build the approach sequences to each airport
independently.
- Terminal routes are merged progressively as they approach to the Initial Approach
Fixes (IAFs). It simplifies the route structure within terminal airspace by ensuring that
the complex task of traffic merging is done outside the Terminal core area.
4.4.3. Description
4.4.3.1 MMMX closed STAR structure
following ATS routes and entry points:

o UJ47-81 (SASUT)
o J13/V52 (XOVAB)
- East
o UJ55 (DATUL)
- South
Figure 26, Stage 3 MMMX STARs
The proposed design establishes and RNAV-1 STAR structure leading traffic to two feeders,
one at the north and other at the south, and merging the south flow in a unique sequence
through a point merge structure. The merging would be designed at or above 14000ft. The
traffic coming from the south could be directed at or above 12000ft to the southern waypoint
to shortcut the transition.
North Feeder
South Feeder
Merging point
Shortcut
alternative
IAF
Figure 27, Stage 3 MMMX STARs (zoom merge point)
Taking into consideration that the main domestic flows come from Cancún and Guadalajara,
and assuming that this traffic would proceed from En route structure to Mexico TMA as
today, the north feeder would receive these flows (DATUL and QUET) producing a
significant unbalance between north and south feeders. As an alternative to balance traffic,
the design proposes to direct the Cancún traffic to the south feeder from PBC VOR/DME.
The flow management service could take into consideration this alternative as a proposal to
the operators to avoid congestion and regulations in the northern sectors during the peak
hours.
4.4.3.2 MMSM closed STAR structure

The new runways of Santa Lucia airport will accommodate the international flights
proceeding from the following ATS routes and entry points:

o UJ47-81 (SASUT)
o UJ35 (AVSAR)
- East
o UJ55 (DATUL)
- South
Similarly, to the Mexico City transition, the proposed design establishes the RNAV-1
standard arrivals routes to connect the en-route with two feeders, one for traffic coming from
the north and northwest, and other for the traffic coming from the east and south. The
east/south flow is integrated in a unique sequence with the north traffic through a point
merge structure. The merging would be produced at or above 12000ft.
Figure 28, Stage 3 MMSM STARs
North/northwest
Feeder
East/south
Feeder
Merging point
IAF
Figure 29, Stage 3 MMSM STARs (zoom merge point)
In terms of traffic flows balance, the arrival traffic to Santa Lucia airport would be much more
balanced than the Mexico City ones. The main flow coming from the West coast of US would
proceed through the North/northwest feeder, and traffic from Europe and South America
would do it through the East/south.
4.4.3.3 MMMX SID

In general terms, the MMMX SID structure would remain the same than for Stage 1. Refer
to 4.2.3.3.
A minor adjustment is required in the SID PBC4C which will be displacing to the east the
turning fix published at 19 DME APN. The purpose is to avoid MMSM incoming traffic from
the south.
4.4.3.4 MMSM SID

To guarantee an appropriate integration to the enroute phase of flight, the new departures
from MMSM are connected to the same SID exit waypoints.
The initial departure track is deviated 15º to the south respect to the extended runway center
line to enable the simultaneous segregated operations. From this initial track, the SIDs will
diverge in different directions:
- PTJ, TLC and CUA: In the initial track, a turning waypoint is placed at 4.6NM away
from DER. Aircraft will turn to the right (IAS max 185kt) proceeding direct to MEX
VOR/DME. From MEX two tracks diverge one to CUA (CUA1B) and other to TLC
(TLC1B and PTJ1B). Finally, a new track is defined from TLC to PTJ (PTJ1B).
- MUXEP, OMPUT, APAN and PBC: These departures keep the initial track up to a
waypoint placed 11.0 NM away from DER. Then, aircraft shall turn to the right to
continue on the track to MUXEP and OMPUT. At 16.9NM from the tuning point the
SIDs to APAN and PBC diverge to the south from the track MUXEP/OMPUT.
SIDs Route connection - Outbound flow PDG approx.

MUXEP1B UJ15-38 north/northeast 5.8%
OMPUT1B J177 north/northeast 5.8%
APAN1B UJ28-30/UT19/UT42/UJ18 east 5.8%
PBC1D UL318/UJ47 east/south-east 5.8%
CUA1B UJ15/UJ39 south 6.0%
TLC1B UJ18/UJ30 west/southwest 6.0%
PTJ1B UJ45 northwest 6.0%
Figure 30, Stage 3 MMMX and MMSM SIDs

The MMSM approaches would remain the same than for stage 1. Refer to 4.2.3.5.
4.4.3.6 MMMX Approach and missed approach

The new RNAV-1 STAR structure is compatible with the AIP instrument approach
procedures published (IAC1 and IAC7). However, it would be needed to deal with some
modifications to the already published approach procedures:
- Initial approach segment: It is needed to displace the IAF MAVEK or SMO 5.7NM to
the northwest. It enables the suitable spacing respect to the MMSM new approach
procedure.
- LOC interceptation: To prevent the LOC overshooting at CI05R, it is proposed to
replace the current 90º turning for interceptation with a RF transition. It enables a
smooth final approach course interceptation providing 2NM distance before the GP
capture.
- Missed approach: Current MAP turning to MIXEX would interfere with the departure
traffic from MMSM (proceeding to MEX VOR/DME). To produce an optimal crossing
in MEX, it is proposed to redefine the missed approach from MEX23 turning to the
right direct to MEX (IAS shall be limited to avoid terrain interferences). From MEX,
the aircraft could be integrated again in the approach sequence.
New IAF
Figure 31, Stage 3 MMMX Missed Approach
4.4.3.7 Stage 3 - Strategic deconfliction at crossing points

In the Stage 3 ConOPS have been identified several crossing points that could be
managed easily in a tactical way. As an alternative solution, these crossings could be
solved adding some vertical restrictions to the proposed routes. Some potential solutions
are detailed below:
MEX - MMSM SIDs (PTJ, TLC and CUA) and MMMX/MMSM STARs:
MMSM SIDs need a vertical restriction at or below FL220 after crossing MEX VOR/DME
to be strategically deconflicted respect to the MMSM/MMMX arrival traffic at MEX. The
arrivals will have a vertical restriction at or above FL230 at MEX (In addition, arrivals to
MMSM and MMMX can be procedurally separated assigned altitude windows).
FL220-
FL230+
FL230+
Figure 32, Stage 3 Crossing at MEX
MMSM SIDs (MUXEP, OMPUT, APAN and PBC) and MMSM STARs:
MMSM SIDs need an initial clearance at 16000ft to strategically deconflict departures

and the MMSM arrival traffic (at or above 17000ft).
Initial clearance A17000+

16000
Figure 33, Stage 3 MMSM SIDs initial clearance
MMMX STAR (DATUL) and MMSM STARs (AVSAR and SOSUT):
It will be needed to add vertical restrictions to strategically deconflict traffic from these
arrivals. One solution could be crossing MMMX arrival from DATUL above the MMSM
STARs.
-FL200
+FL210
Figure 34, Stage 3 MMMX and MMSM north arrival flows crossing
MMSM STARs (South) and MMMX SIDs (MUXEP1/OMPUT1/APN7A/PBC4C):
It is needed to add vertical restrictions to strategically deconflict departure traffic from

MMMX and arrivals to MMSM. A potential solution could be to add an “at or above FL210”
constraint to the MMSM STAR and “at or below FL200” to the MMMX ones.
Figure 35, Stage 3 MMMX and MMSM departures crossing
• Combined arrival/departure traffic increases considering both airports and using the
max MMMX airport rate of 72(*) and hour as a base line;
(*) MMMX maximum capacity rate is currently stated as 61 per hour. This rate is more
likely to be achieved or surpassed, with a rate as high as 72 using fully separated
traffic and lower percentage of heavy traffic into MMMX airport
o MMSM two runway non independant operation (1 DEP, 1 ARR): MMMX 72 +

MMSM 58(**) = max rate 130 and hour.
(**) MMSM 58 rate is lowered based on international traffic mix including a higher
number of heavies, requiring more ATC separation on final.
o MMSM two runway independant operation: MMMX 72 + MMSM 68(**) = max

rate 140 per hour.
.
• MMSM and MMMX traffic would be fully separated from high altitude (en-route),
horizontally and vertically, to the threshold, increasing the level of safety and
efficiency.
• New ATC sectors and a reorganization of some traffic flows would lead to increased
safety and efficiencies.
• CDO and CCO would be easier to provide from the ATC perspective
Figure 36, Stage 3 CONOPS
Figure 37, Stage 3 CONOPS (only arrivals)

Estudio de Factibilidad NavBlue

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Estudio de Factibilidad NavBlue

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Estudio de Factibilidad NavBlue

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 TECHNICAL FEASABILITY REPORT NAVB.DOC.18.

Airspace Design technical feasibility of simultaneous

Your NAVBLUE Focal point : Maxime CAILLE

NAVBLUE Chief Procedure designer

NAVBLUE Procedure designer

NAVBLUE Project manager

Issue Date Review description

3. Project assumptions and strategy

4. MMMX – MMSM conceptual design

As per contract A200558, NAVBLUE, conducted a pre-study assessing the technical

This document provides several options of conceptual design, ranked by simplicity of

The second proposed conceptual design (Stage 2) provides an enhancement of Stage 1

2.1. Introduction and purpose

2.2. Study team cooperation

Name Organization Role

2.3. Background and general overview

Figure 1, MEXICO CITY (MMMX) LOCATION

3. Project assumptions and

3.1. Project assumptions

3.1.1. Runway and airport data

Figure 3, MMMX runway chart

Figure 4, Santa Lucia runway master plan

3.1.2. Traffic data

Figure 5, MEXICO CITY AIRPORT

For domestic flights:

Cancun/Merida – Mexico City (North East sector)

For international flights:

USA East cost / Europe – Mexico City (North East)

Lima / Bogota / Medellin / Quito – Mexico City (South East)

Figure 6, Geographical distribution of domestic and international flights

3.1.3. Design assumptions

The main assumptions considered in the pre-study:

Protection areas and Obstacle/terrain assessment:

- Aeronautical data, local procedures and instrument flight procedures of MMMX.

3.2. Project strategy

The implementation of flight operations in a new international airport in a relatively confined

Stage 1: Short term implementation (6-18 months, increase in capacity of 49%)

Stage 2: Medium term implementation (18-24 months, increase in capacity of 89%-104%)

The objective of stage 2 is to enhance efficiency of stage 1 by slightly modifying navigation

Stage 3: Long term implementation (24-48 months)

Stage 3 provides a preliminary conceptual design that requires a global modification of

4. MMMX – MMSM conceptual

4.1. Current traffic from/to MMMX

4.1.1. Arrivals RWY05

Figure 8, Arrivals from the North to SLM VOR

Figure 9, Arrivals from the South to SMO VOR

Figure 10, Overlay of traffic and current STARs

The Procedures are limited in altitude with the following constraints:

- Above 13000ft and below 16000ft over SLM VOR

4.1.2. Departures RWY05

Figure 11, MMMX RWY05 Departures East

Figure 12, MMMX RWY05 Departures South/West

Figure 13, Actual traffic departing from MMMX

4.2. Conceptual design stage 1

4.2.1. Principles and assumptions

- Airspace structure: Minor adjustments on vertical restrictions in the current

- Navigation infrastructure. No expected changes.

- Navigation specification: Assuming that proposed concept will be applied in a radar

- Procedural vertical separation will be provided in the arrival/departure or

- The sequencing of international aircraft to MMSM would be accomplished on the